Questions/Answers

Everyone generated solid waste every day but traditionally it was left to a municipality’s responsibility to manage it. To handle 10 tons of daily waste was a challenge for Ngao Tambon Municipality. In the past ,solid waste disposal at 18 local dumpsites creating environmental problems and public nuisances. The situation got worse when waste was burnt to clear the space. But, the municipality had a budget constraint to invest in waste collection and waste disposal that would have to come at the expense of other development projects. Everyone, Every Waste is an inclusive model for sustainable solid waste management started in the Fiscal Year 2015 (beginning Oct 2014). It was based on the observation that from its composition: 60% organic, 14% recyclable, 1% hazardous, and 25% other, waste should not be wasted. And, the municipality should not further waste public money trying to collect all for disposal. It was far better to design a model that could encourage all stakeholders to separate and utilize these resources. The Ngao model consisted of 3 steps to promote source separation. The first step was to have households composting organic waste in their own backyard by introducing simple yet effective equipment. The second step was to support local groups to create jobs and incomes from recycling. The third step was to establish a social norm of source separation in all villages through monitoring. After these three steps, most of waste would be reduced or used in productive activities. The municipality could then focus on the management of high-impact items such as hazardous waste and have a complete system despite its limited resources.

The initiative has 4 main objectives. 1. Reduce the amount of waste for final disposal and close down dumpsites. Dumpsites are important sources of pollution. The diversion of waste will improve the environmental health in the subdistrict. 2. Ensure that all villages in the subdistrict equally contribute to solving the problem. Everyone generates waste; so, it is fair that all villages must manage their own waste. No party, not even the municipality, will be asked to shoulder all the responsibility. 3. Encourage households to participate in making decisions, taking actions and sharing benefits. The details of how waste should be managed within each village will be decided by its members. They will also participate in the implementation and evaluation. This will create a sense of ownership. 4. Allocate budget to maximize the positive impacts and co-benefits. Instead of wasting public money on collecting mixed waste for dumping, the limited resources of Ngao Tambon Municipality should be freed and allocated to activities that are more productive and enhance people’s wellbeing.

In order to meet the 4 objectives, MSWM in Ngao fits very well with a theme of UNPSA in 2018: Making institutions inclusive and ensuring participation in decision-making. The service is no longer the sole responsibility of Ngao Tambon Municipality. Villagers make decisions regarding the waste reduction activities and different groups are working to promote source separation. Community leaders mobilize people to install home composters in households. Elders help collecting recyclables for the group of housewives to make handicrafts from secondary materials. School students assist in the monitoring of households. The public participation model does not only reduce the amount of waste to final disposal by 85%, but also turns the separated waste into useful resources for productive recycling activities. As actions speak louder than words – the tangible benefits raise people’s awareness on the importance of their inputs into public administration.

The initiative improves the delivery of public services according to Target 17.17 by mobilizing resources from public-private-people partnership. MSWM is no longer a sole responsibility of the municipality but is co-produced by households, local groups, communities and other stakeholders. The other process improvement is the evidence-based monitoring system which continuously measuring the effectiveness of the intervention to advance the accountability goal of Target 17.19. The improvements in MSWM are in line with SDGs 11 and 12. Target 11.6 aims at reducing per capita environmental impact in cities. The initiative has diverted more than 80% of solid waste from final disposal. This does not only reduce impacts related to waste disposal, e.g. global warming and contamination of underground water, but also increases the recycling rate according to Target 12.5. In addition, it enables the municipality to focus the limited resources on the management of hazardous waste. The provisions of special bins and collection services for hazardous waste ensure the safe disposal of chemicals according to Target 12.4. Last but not least, the improvements in public cleanliness indirectly contributes to Targets 6.3.1 and 14.1.1 by stopping plastic waste to find its ways to our water bodies and ocean, respectively.

The significant improvement is the ascription of responsibilities in MSWM. Previously many people perceived that the municipality had to provide waste removal services but did not realize that this would have come at the expense of delays in other developments. In was evident in Thailand that the unwillingness to pay the fees further made the cost recovery of the service generally poor. But, all have changed for the better after solid participation was created. Households and communities have learnt how much they could reduce the burden and seen benefits returned to them both directly (see 3.b) and indirectly in terms of more budget for other development such as street lighting, water purification projects and other health and social welfare programs. According to research done by Mae Fah Luang University, the change in the mindset toward co-production of this public service helped saving 3.3 million THB a year that would otherwise have to be spent on waste collection and disposal in Ngao case. Now, some villages even introduce a variation of unit-based pricing on their own volitions by imposing high fees on households that generate waste beyond an agreed level.

Households in Ngao Subdistrict are the ones mostly benefiting from the initiative. The closedown of 14 dumpsites and improved cleanliness have considerably enhanced the environmental health and livability of the communities. The incidence of diarrhea dropped from 1,839 to 325 per 100,000 population and dengue fever had disappeared between 2014 and 2016. The promotion of safe food through the utilization of organic compost from waste further improved people’s health. The blood tests showed that the proportion of people with a very high risk of chemical contamination dropped from 85% to 29% in the same period. Besides saving to the municipality, several groups benefit economically from the intervention. First, an increase in source separation efforts creates jobs in recycling businesses. The number of junk shops in Ngao has increased to 12 during the past five years. Elders also sort and donate low-value recyclables materials such as plastic bags, laundry packaging when they collect their monthly elder allowance. Local groups the members of which are mainly housewives make additional income by turning these secondary materials into handicrafts. Last but not least, school students use the knowledge from household monitoring to develop a garbage bank and 3Rs learning center.

MSWM in Thailand is legally assigned to local government but in reality many lacked resources to carry out the task properly. Ngao Tambon Municipality could not followed the traditional approach to provide a waste removal service. It was estimated that it would need to invest 28 million THB in 5 garbage trucks and facilities to dispose of 10 tons of waste that was generated every day. But, Ngao is a small local government with the total annual budget of only 50 million THB. The Ngao model is thus innovative in the way it arranges and mobilizes resources from stakeholders for the management of different types of waste. Because most people in the subdistrict live in a detached house with a sizable land area, they are asked to manage organic waste in their own garden. The rural context is still rich in social capitals. Local groups are organized to use secondary resources from recycling in productive activities. A social norm of source separation is institutionalized and actively enforced by all villages. The only waste fraction that the municipality directly manage is hazardous waste which it collects and sends for safe disposal.

While several of its components were adaptations from other contexts, the way they were put together into the 3-step model was rather innovative. The model provided an overall framework to ensure activities at different levels that match with different types of waste. At the end of the day, the villages were the ones that chose the concrete actions to implement the 3-step model. Ngao had studied other best practices of community-based waste management in Chiang Rai: village rules and the management of hazardous waste in Chiang Kian Subdistrict, the flag system from Baan Pong Sri Nakorn in Rong Chang Subdistrict, and sa-wians for home composting from Chiang Rai Provincial Administrative Organization. But, these activities were not copied and pasted. Pilot projects were used to test the feasibility of the ideas and modify them to fit with the local context. Sa-wian – a home composting system made of bamboo – was first introduced through a contest on the 2015 Mother Day. After it was proved that the equipment was easy to make and use by households, a village rule on home composting was developed. Similarly the flag system was piloted at Baan Don Yaeng before being introduced to other villages.

Man. There were 4 core teams. The policy team at the subdistrict level consisted the mayor, the council, and the 20 village heads. Then, there were 2 teams for the implementation in each village. The action team was led by the village head and other local groups. The monitoring team consisted of school students and health volunteers. The fourth was the evaluation team from the municipality, hospitals, schools and Mae Fah Luang University. Money. Ngao Tambon Municipality provides the budget for all trainings and study visits to its staff and villagers. It also subsidized equipment for composting and recycling activities and financed the management of hazardous waste. Additional fund for the villages came from recycling revenues. Materials. Besides the materials sponsored by the municipality, communities mobilizes their own resources such as bamboo for sa-wians, donated recyclables for handicraft groups, agricultural residues for compost making. Management. The initiative was managed by committees at subdistrict and village levels. The goals and indicators were set for the whole subdistrict. This provided backing to the management at the village level that focused on implementation. A mobile application was developed in 2017 to support reporting and communication between the two levels.

是

The initiative has been a role model for other local governments and communities in Thoeng District. Ngao Tambon Municipality has been working with Thoeng District Office and became a learning center for sustainable MSWM. After study visits, Ngew and Tub Tao subdistricts has sent its officers to consult with Ngao for the introduction of home composting in their areas. The latter was also working with World Vision International to transfer other activities from Ngao to improve the quality of life of minority groups in its highland. Baan Don Yaeng from Ngao was one of the 18 environmental model village of Chiang Rai Provincial Administrative Organization. In 2018, Chiang Khong District has implemented the 3-Step Model in all of its villages. After the initiative won awards and recognitions at national levels, there have been more than 170 study visits to see MSWM in Ngao. In May 2017, representatives from Ngao and Baan Don Yaeng made a presentation in Japan as part of Thai Environment Institute (TEI)’s Stop Global Warming Program. MSWM in Ngao was also selected as a showcase in Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ training on sufficiency economy where 17 officers from 16 developing countries participated in December 2017.

The initiative has enhanced all three pillars of sustainability. It successfully changes people’s behaviors in line with the so-called waste management hierarchy. Waste is transformed into resources. Organic waste is composted and utilized in the production of local, safe food. Recyclables are separated and sold or made into handicrafts through upcycling groups. Participation in the management of waste at source is therefore helping households and communities to cut down expenses and generate additional revenues. It also allows the municipality to better allocate the limited budget. Unlike many local governments that have to spend a lot of money in moving around collecting garbage, Ngao Tambon Municipality can focus on the management of hazardous waste that poses serious threat of toxic contamination. Spare resources can also be used in other productive activities and developmental projects. Last but not least, the empowerment is an important social asset for sustainability. The structure of working groups at subdistrict and village levels will enable stakeholders to work together and collectively solve social problems, not limited to waste issues.

The initiative is going to be sustainable in a long term. The process-oriented of the initiative has encouraged continuous improvements. Successive achievements and awards provided abundant proof to this. Based on the success of the initiative, the mayor of Ngao Tambon Municipality has announced the Healthy Community Development with 6 main agenda: 1) environmental health, 2) health equity, 3) participatory health care, 4) healthy society, 5) health technology, and 6) healthy economy. The agenda are translated into projects in the Ngao Subdistrict 3-Year Development Plan (2018-2020). At a community level, people and local groups give continuous supports because of the tangible benefits such as safe food production and additional income from recycling. In addition, the pride of being a role model and the recognitions motivate community leaders and people of Ngao to continue working together.

是

The initiative has been evaluated both internally and externally. The municipality has to report the result of waste reduction to the Department of Local Administration (DLA), Ministry of Interior. Therefore, it has been working with villages to periodically monitor the progress of the activities and outcomes. They also seek to benchmark themselves with others by voluntarily entering national contests. At a community level, the environmental management was evaluated by the Department of Environmental Quality Promotion (DEQP), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment in its Zero Waste Competition and by Thai Environment Institute (TEI) in its Stop Global Warming Program. At a local government level, Ngao submitted this initiative to the Office of the Permanent Secretary, the Office of the Prime Minister for the Local Administrative Organization with Good Governance Award. MSWM in Ngao also featured as one of the nine cases in an impact assessment carried out by Mae Fah Luang University (MFU) and funded by Thailand Research Fund (TRF).

The monitoring showed that 93% of households had participated and changed their waste handling behaviors. The participation led to 85% reduction of waste disposal and enabled the municipality to close down 70% of the dumpsites. 4 villages from Ngao were in the final round of 89 communities in the Zero Waste Competition in 2016. Baan Don Yaeng went on to won the 5th place and in 2017 finished as a runner-up in the 12th Stop Global Warming Program. Ngao Tambon Municipality also got the Good Governance Award in 2017. The research showed that the initiative led to 88% saving in financial costs of MSWM and lowered environmental impacts from waste collection and disposal.

Household monitoring measures the participation rate based on checklists of village waste handling rules and household sanitation. The checklists consist of key behavioral points such as the existence of home composting equipment, recycling station, etc. Each household is required to pass 80% of waste separation and 90% of sanitation standards. Waste reduction target of DLA is measured by the tonnage of waste sent for final disposal compared with the base year. DEQP used 29 indicators to assess the 6 pillars of zero waste communities: local government’s support, stakeholder participation, 3Rs activities, results and sustainability, sufficiency economy, and other environmental co-benefits. The evaluation by TEI program further added the reduction of greenhouse gases (kg-CO2 equivalent) from village’s actions as a key indicator. Similar to UNPSA, the Good Governance Award considered the improvements in processes, outputs and outcomes of public services delivered by local governments. The academic assessment focused on waste reduction compared to the business-as-usual scenario, and the results in terms of saved budget for MSWM and net reduction in environmental impacts based on life cycle assessment (LCA).

1) Households. Household engagement was instrument in the design of the initiative. The sa-wian contest served as the proof of concept to the feasibility of the first step of the model. The households also played their part in the full implementation of the model. Source separation of organic waste and recyclables was the foundation of all other activities. 2) Village heads and village committee. Their unwavering support and commitment were the driver of the implementation. Several even made significant contribution to the design and modifications of the intervention as in the case of the introduction of unit-based pricing. 3) Local groups. They are the ones who created the activities to utilize and create values form waste materials, e.g. turning them into beautiful handicrafts, useful products, or even safe food. These activities enlivened and bring variety to the initiative. 4) School students. They were effective norm setters. The students worked with village committee and health volunteers in monitoring households. They were perceived as impartial and their evaluation to give either green, yellow or red flag to a household went uncontested. Their engagement also motivated their circles and the parents to participate. 5) Municipal management and officers. In addition to the direct roles in the initiative, they linked other activities to waste management, e.g. reviewing and encouraging elders to bring in recyclables when they came and got their monthly allowance. The willingness to integrate participatory waste management into other work domains helped pushed forward the intervention. 6) Theong District Office, Chiang Rai PAO, and Mae Fah Luang University played an important role in drawing and disseminating lessons from the Ngao model to the district, provincial and national levels.

1) Lesson drawing and piloting. While it is a waste of time to reinventing the wheel, a mindless policy transfer is likely to end up in a failure. The examples of sa-wians and the flag system showed that the pilots were instrumental in proving the feasibility and convincing other villages and households to follow the examples. 2) Embeddedness. The initiative was embedded in a national policy which forced all leaders to agree on the need to change waste management practices in order to close dumpsites. The agreement at the subdistrict level provided the village heads with the backing against any opposition to change within his/her own village. However, the policies at higher levels should outline goals and leave implementation details to be decided through participatory processes at the ground level. 3) Rewarding. People wanted to do good things as long as the actions were not too difficult, as can be seen in the stepwise approach. The behavioral changes could be reinforced through non-monetary rewards which should be reviewed periodically. As most households now get the green flag, it is under a discussion to add a new tier of recognition to promote the 6 aspects of mayor’s new and integrative policy.